Romans 3:10-11 "There is none righteous, ...who understands, ...who seeks after God, no, not one;

[PaulThomson]

Paul, with all due respect, my argument is based on the verses that I posted and the context of the Bible. I don't define verses on an island. And while the original languages have their place, and are a useful tool, I don't look at the reading of the original languages as a cure all, as some do, at the expense of context. The original languages can be, and are often abused even more than the English. Ask the people who translate them for a living. The original languages require a recognition of the Biblical context and are defined by it, just like the English is, and even more so. The translators of our modern day Bible translations say this all the time, that the original languages are abused more than the English is.

• D.A. Carson (New Testament Scholar and translation consultant): In his seminal work Exegetical Fallacies, he dedicates an entire section to the abuse of original languages. He warns against "root-meaning fallacies" (assuming a word's historical root defines its meaning) and cautions that "it is remarkably easy to manipulate the Greek text to make it say whatever the preacher wants it to say." [1, 2]
• Gordon Fee (New Testament scholar and translator): In New Testament Exegesis, he cautions students about the "illegitimate totality transfer"—a fallacy where people read all the possible meanings of a Greek word into a single verse, thereby abusing the original language to teach a concept not intended by the author. [1]
• Daniel B. Wallace (Greek grammarian and translator): He has frequently written about "myths" regarding Bible translation. He warns pastors and teachers against using phrases like "in the Greek, this really means..." to introduce a creative, personal definition, as it often contradicts the recognized rules of grammar and syntax. [1]
• Robert L. Plummer (Professor of New Testament Interpretation): Scholars often note that laypeople tend to think Greek and Hebrew are "magical" or more inherently precise languages, which leads to treating the original languages as a secret code. However, scholars acknowledge that they are still human languages with semantic ranges that must be controlled by sound literary context. [1, 2, 3, 4]

Wuest ---"The English reader is at the mercy of the translator. But the student of the Greek text must remember that a word is known by the company it keeps. To understand a word, one must see it in its environment."

"Any attempt to deal in an adequate way with the Epistle to the Hebrews must be based, not only upon a knowledge of the Greek text, but upon a clear understanding of the historical background of the letter."

"Smoothness of diction and elegance of expression have been sacrificed in order to bring out more clearly the thought of the original."

I agree with these comments. But how do you determine whether a translator has followed these injunctions, or has imposed his own theological positions onto a text by pretending he follows the above principles? We need to reason our interpretation by showing how it meets the above criteria, and not merely claim we are applying those principles. I showed how the laws of basic English usage do not lead to your interpretation of “There is none righteous, no, not one.” and "No one is good but God”. You need to show how your understanding meets the above pronciples you cited, and why mine does not. Your merely citing the principles does not prove you have applied them.

 

[PaulThomson]

Without the Vine, we, the branches cannot bear good fruit. That's what it says. And there was more than one verse posted. God gets the credit for that, not our flesh. It's Him, His goodness, His righteousness, His holiness, from His Spirit. From our flesh, what we can take credit for is not good, not righteousness, and not holy. What do we offer according to the flesh that is good or righteous?

The Law requires of us perfect obedience, perfect righteousness, no blemishes.

I agree that the Law requires of us perfect obedience, perfect righteousness, no blemishes. That was what I said. So, one blemish on our record is enough to condemn us, regardless of how many perfect deeds we may have done. So why do you have this need to extend sin into every aspect of every deed and thought, when the Bible does not do so?

A person, from the flesh, cannot produce one work that can be placed in the good, or righteous column. Even though God requires a whole lifetime of nothing but good and righteous.

Galatians 5:17, John 6:63, Romans 8:7-8, 7:18

You need to demonstrate from scripture that "A person, from the flesh, cannot produce one work that can be placed in the good, or righteous column.” Your supposed proof texts don’t actually say that, when read as we would normally read an English text.

"PaulThomson said:
You are beginning with a theological idea you have assumed, that we are all tainted from conception with original sin and that taints every aspect of everything that we do and say and think and desire. And you are then reading texts in a way that will support that assumption, rather than reading texts the same way as you would read a non-theological text."

I did not assume it, I gave Scripture to support it. I only added to that the Calvinist interpretation that man will not even desire to do or have good is not included in that. Man, if unable to produce one act that is good or righteous according to God's righteous standards, cannot justify Himself. For if man can do one act of good and righteousness from the flesh, then man CAN, at least in theory, justify Himself. But Jesus stated very clearly, for what is impossible for man is possible for God. We cannot obey God in any meaningful way without the Spirit of God in us. It's not the Spirit making our flesh good, it's the Spirit that is the good and is doing so through us. That's the fruit of the Spirit.

Not everything a man does is from the flesh. many things are from the heart, and the flesh is disciplined into performing it. Noah built the ark in faith and obedience toward God. Was his labour 100% sinful, and none of his work considered righteous by God? Really? The calvinist interpretation assumes the same unbiblical assumptions you are superimposing on the scriptures.

How does a man doing one act of good and righteousness mean that man can justify himself if many any single act of his is morally wrong..

Do you know what original sin is? It's a separation from God.

No. The original sin was to not trust God, to believe the lie and to eat from the forbidden tree. The sense of separation from God was something man’s distrust of God produced in man. God did not separate from man. He sought Adam after he sinned. He came to and spoke with Cain after Cain murdered Abel. Those are not something someone who has separated Himself from sinners would do.

That's what we inherited from Adam, a separation from God. The source of good. God alone is good. This is not an assumption. The Bible actually teaches this. Separated from God, we cannot do good, or righteousness, not one act, according to God's holy standards of good and righteousness. That's why God says that our righteousness is like filthy rags (Isaiah 64:6). That's why without the Vine, we can do nothing [good]. That's why we can say that whatever we have that is good, we received it, and it's a gift, from God, not of ourselves.

Romans 7:18 For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh) nothing good dwells; for to will is present with me, but how to perform what is good I do not find.

Romans 8:7-8 Because the carnal mind is enmity against God; for it is not subject to the law of God, nor indeed can be.
So then, those who are in the flesh cannot please God.

Why are the good things listed as fruit of the Spirit in the Galatians passage below, and not the fruit of the flesh also? And how come the flesh only has the bad things listed? Isn't there some good from the flesh?

The flesh is only one part of an unregenerated man. He also has a soul/mind and a spirit. A carnal mind sets itself on the things the flesh wants (food, power, sensations). The spiritual mind sets itself on things the spirit wants (justice, truth, love). The man driven from the flesh (instinct/survival) acts contrary to God’s ways (laying down one’s life for others). But a man can develop noble principles through his spirit and mind, and impose those principles on the flesh intermittently. Paul was lamenting his flesh’ power to oppose the noble and drive him to pursue self-preservation. It was bringing him into intermittent sins that condemned him because they kept on stained his record, even after each Day of Atonement, when all his sins were remiited. He was not saying that it was making any good behaviour impossible.

Galatians 5:17-23

Same problem. Not of continuous sinning, but of sometimes/ntermittent/continual sinning, which renders us unrighteous in God’s sight, and because of which we separate ourselves from God.
[/QUOTE]

Why are the good things listed as fruit of the Spirit in the Galatians passage below, and not the fruit of the flesh also? And how come the flesh only has the bad things listed? Isn't there some good from the flesh?

Flesh is instinctive and driven by survival. But he who would save his life shall lose it. The Holy Spirit’s fruit are the result of dying to self and giving away one’s life. That is why the flesh profits nothing.

 

[maximc]

Pro 14:12
There is a way which seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death.

That says nothing like "everyone thinks that they are right from their own perspective."

Rom 5:12 Διὰ (Through) τοῦτο (this) ὥσπερ (just as) δι᾽ ἑνὸς (through one) ἀνθρώπου (man) ἡ ἁμαρτία (the sin) εἰς (into) τὸν κόσμον (the world) εἰσῆλθεν (came-into at some point/s) καὶ (and) διὰ (through) τῆς ἁμαρτίας (the sin) ὁ θάνατος (the death) καὶ (even/and) οὕτως (in the same way/so) εἰς (into) πάντας (all) ἀνθρώπους (men) ὁ θάνατος (the death) διῆλθεν (went-through at some point/s) ἐφ᾽ (upon) ᾧ (which) πάντες (all men) ἥμαρτον (sinned at some point/s, aorist active indicative).

Through this, just as the sin came into one man at some point’s, and death through the sin, also in the same way death made its way into all men upon the basis of which all sinned/sin at some point.

If I say that I heard that my wife had driven her vehicle into a wall in the car park upon which she suffered whiplash, I would not assume that whiplash caused her to hit the wall. Likewise, hearing that all men became mortal upon which all sinned, I would not assume that all men became mortal because all sinned.

This appears to me to be saying that physical death was imposed upon all Adam’s descendants because of Adam’s own sin. And in the same death made its way into all mankind, so that as a result of becoming mortal, all succumbed at some point to temptations to sin.. It does not appear to me to be saying that all died because they sinned. We were all sentenced to mortality, whether we sinned or not, hence babies in the womb are mortal before they have done anything either good or evil. It does not seem to me to be saying that death came upon all because all sinned, but that all who sinned sinned because they were mortal.

If I say everyone was admitted to the wedding on the basis of showing an official invitation to security, I am not saying that every single person in the world was admitted into the wedding because they all showed official invitations. I am saying that everyone who was admitted into the wedding was admitted in the basis of .showing an official invitation.

Just so, Paul is not saying that every single person committed some sin, and that is why they died. He is saying that every single person who sinned, sinned because they were mortal; their sense of mortality drove them to sin. Babies in the womb have done nothing geither ood or evil. So, they have not sinned. And yet many of them die, because they were subject to mortality because of Adam’s sentence for Adam’s sin.
Rom 9:11
(For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth

Rom. 5:12 - Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:
Shall we look at this verse properly?
1. "by one man sin entered into this world" - do you agree?
2. "death by sin" - sin is the cause for death - do you agree?
3. "death passed upon all men" - acknowledge that everyone dies - do you agree?
4. "for that all have sinned" - Here the word "for" means "because". The reason why everyone experiences death is "because all have sinned" - do you agree?

 

[PaulThomson]

Rom. 5:12 - Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:
Shall we look at this verse properly?
1. "by one man sin entered into this world" - do you agree?
2. "death by sin" - sin is the cause for death - do you agree?
3. "death passed upon all men" - acknowledge that everyone dies - do you agree?
4. "for that all have sinned" - Here the word "for" means "because". The reason why everyone experiences death is "because all have sinned" - do you agree?

1. yes
2. yes.
3. yes.
4. No. … "ἐφ᾽ (upon) ᾧ (which) πάντες (all men) ἥμαρτον (sin/sinned at some point/s, aorist active indicative).

eph’Oi does not mean because. It does not introduce a causal clause, but a consequential clause.

Therefore, “… upon receiving the penalty of death/mortality, all who later sin/sinned, sin/sinned.”
All who sin/sinned subsequent to Adam’s sin, sin/sinned because they have/had inherited mortality.
'

 

[maximc]

1. yes
2. yes.
3. yes.
4. No. … "ἐφ᾽ (upon) ᾧ (which) πάντες (all men) ἥμαρτον (sin/sinned at some point/s, aorist active indicative).

eph’Oi does not mean because. It does not introduce a causal clause, but a consequential clause.

Therefore, “… upon receiving the penalty of death/mortality, all who later sin/sinned, sin/sinned.”
All who sin/sinned subsequent to Adam’s sin, sin/sinned because they have/had inherited mortality.
'

Ok. Let me give you the benefit of the doubt. Even then, once we receive salvation, 1 John 3:9 says that anyone born of God will not commit sin. It means once our dead spirit is made alive, it will always guide us not to commit sin. Then, Rom. 3:10-11 will not hold good to those who are born again. It applies only to those who are not yet born again.

 

[PaulThomson]

Ok. Let me give you the benefit of the doubt. Even then, once we receive salvation, 1 John 3:9 says that anyone born of God will not commit sin. It means once our dead spirit is made alive, it will always guide us not to commit sin. Then, Rom. 3:10-11 will not hold good to those who are born again. It applies only to those who are not yet born again.

3:9 Πᾶς (everyone) ὁ (the one) γεγεννημένος (perfect passive participle, having been born) ἐκ (out of) τοῦ θεοῦ (the God) ἁμαρτίαν (a sin) οὐ (not) ποιεῖ (is doing/performing/practising) ὅτι (because) σπέρμα (seed) αὐτοῦ (his) ἐν (in) αὐτῷ (him) μένει (present active indicative, is remaining/abiding) καὶ (and) οὐ (not) δύναται (he is able) ἁμαρτάνειν (present active indicative, to be sinning) ὅτι (because) ἐκ (out of) τοῦ (the) θεοῦ (God) γεγέννηται (perfect passive indicative, he has been born).

No one who has been born out of God keeps on performing a sin, because God’s seed abides in him and he is not able to be continuously sinning, because he has been born out of God.

Does this being true prevent Romans 3:10-11 holding true for those born again?

Rom 3:10 As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one:
Rom 3:11 There is none that keeps on understanding, there is none that keeps on seeking after God.

The born again believer has a desire to walk in the Spirit, mostly avoids sin, and mostly understands and seeks God, higher values and virtues, but he slips into sin, ignorance and not seeking God sometimes, as he slips into walking in the flesh.
The unbeliever has a tendency to walk in the flesh and mostly sins, lacks understanding is not seeking God, but he sometimes sets his mind on understanding and seeking God as the Holy Spirit draws him, but he mostly fails to understand and seek God.

Both need mercy for whatever sins they commit and to understand and seek God. The believer knows how to quickly access that grace and abides in assured forgiveness, but the unbeliever does not know whether God forgives him or not.

 

[Dave123]

Paul wrote:

I agree with these comments. But how do you determine whether a translator has followed these injunctions, or has imposed his own theological positions onto a text by pretending he follows the above principles? We need to reason our interpretation by showing how it meets the above criteria, and not merely claim we are applying those principles. I showed how the laws of basic English usage do not lead to your interpretation of “There is none righteous, no, not one.” and "No one is good but God”. You need to show how your understanding meets the above principles you cited, and why mine does not. Your merely citing the principles does not prove you have applied them.

My posts were not being posted. I'll need to answer the rest tomorrow.

This is where hermeneutics comes into play. The many interpret the few. And the context, both great and small, as much as we know about it. That will usually weed out the bad translations.

Example: Many Catholics cling to a few passages that say 'believe and be water baptized for the remission of sins'. In reality, those same passages can linguistically, equally, be translated as the baptism not being the cause of salvation but rather what is done afterwards. Given the rest of the Bible and it's clear teaching in this matter, it's safe to say that water baptism, combined with faith, doesn't save anyone. It's faith that saves. The translators, probably not thinking this through, just repeated old mistakes. Like when they used old English words like "tongues", instead of "languages" in our modern translations. They were probably not sure if they were translating something away that should be there, and played it safe by continuing to use the old English word "tongues". That word simply means languages. No hocus pocus unless the Bible indicates it, like in Acts, when they each heard the others in their own language. These are obvious translators errors. The KJV is full of error like that. Like sometimes translating the words 'Hades' to 'Hell'. The meaning was the same for Hell back then in 16:11 as it is for Hades today. But Hell is defined differently today. The NKJV Bible updated this and translated it accurately.

First, "no one is righteous, no not one". That the clearest understanding and should be understood just as it reads. Likewise, "there are none who do good, no not one." It does not say that there are none who ARE good, meaning a standard is being met, like with the righteousness statement. It means that none do good, no not one. Doing good all the time will meet those righteous standards, but we know, 'there are none righteous', because 'none do good'. The doing good is the pathway to righteousness. All good, righteous. Did they do a good act according to righteousness standards?....."none do good, no not one". Not even one good act? "none do good, no not one". Therefore none are righteous. Who is righteous? The only one who did do good "it is finished". Jesus, God alone is good. God alone can do good. God alone can do all good. All that we have apart from God is the flesh.

Romans 8:18 For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh) nothing good dwells; for to will is present with me, but how to perform what is good I do not find.

Romans 11:9-10 that if you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you will be saved. For with the heart one believes unto righteousness, and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation

Were does good come from? Remember what was said about the flesh above. Flesh dead! Spirit, life!

Romans 9:14 But you are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if indeed the Spirit of God dwells in you. Now if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he is not His. And if Christ is in you, the body is dead because of sin, but the Spirit is life because of righteousness.
But if the Spirit of Him who raised Jesus from the dead dwells in you, He who raised Christ from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies through His Spirit who dwells in you. Therefore, brethren, we are debtors--not to the flesh, to live according to the flesh. For if you live according to the flesh you will die; but if by the Spirit you put to death the deeds of the body, you will live.
For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, these are sons of God.

Ephesians 4:8 Therefore He says: "When He ascended on high, He led captivity captive, And gave gifts to men."

Without the Spirit indwelling, man does not have these gifts. That's why the gifts were given at Pentecost. They were given the Gift of the Promise of the Spirit, and as a result, the gifts of the Spirit, the fruit of the Spirit. Before this, "there are none righteous, no not one, there are none who does good, no not one". John 15:5.

1 Corinthians 4:7, James 1:17,

 

[Dave123]

I agree that the Law requires of us perfect obedience, perfect righteousness, no blemishes. That was what I said. So, one blemish on our record is enough to condemn us, regardless of how many perfect deeds we may have done. So why do you have this need to extend sin into every aspect of every deed and thought, when the Bible does not do so?

What does it say about the flesh? This is us without God.

You need to demonstrate from scripture that "A person, from the flesh, cannot produce one work that can be placed in the good, or righteous column.” Your supposed proof texts don’t actually say that, when read as we would normally read an English text.

Romans 8:18 For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh) nothing good dwells; for to will is present with me, but how to perform what is good I do not find.

I've been posting it. The flesh is contrasted with the Spirit. One produces sin. The other produces good and is as a result of that, righteous. The Holy Spirit never sins. The flesh never does what is good. We need the Spirit to do that. This is why it is called the fruit of the Spirit, and not the fruit of the flesh. I went over this already.

Not everything a man does is from the flesh. many things are from the heart, and the flesh is disciplined into performing it. Noah built the ark in faith and obedience toward God. Was his labour 100% sinful, and none of his work considered righteous by God? Really? The calvinist interpretation assumes the same unbiblical assumptions you are superimposing on the scriptures.

Yes, everything that man does is from the flesh if it is not from the Holy Spirit.

Noah had the Holy Spirit upon Him. This was common when there was a task to accomplish, usually for Prophets and the Apostles before the cross. Plus there was filling in the OT which means to be more under the control of the Holy Spirit. Prophets, Judges, and Kings....individuals like Moses (Numbers 11:17), David (1 Samuel 16:13), and Daniel (Daniel 4:8) were given wisdom, strength, and the ability to prophesy. There was no indwelling in the OT. There was no righteousness from the flesh, no not one, none who did good, no not one is an OT statement.

How does a man doing one act of good and righteousness mean that man can justify himself if many any single act of his is morally wrong..

If he can do one, then he can do another. Then it's theoretically possible that he could live a completely righteous life. But for man that is impossible. Man, who cannot do good needs a lifetime of good to be righteous before God.

No. The original sin was to not trust God, to believe the lie and to eat from the forbidden tree. The sense of separation from God was something man’s distrust of God produced in man. God did not separate from man. He sought Adam after he sinned. He came to and spoke with Cain after Cain murdered Abel. Those are not something someone who has separated Himself from sinners would do.

Jesus restores that peace between us and God. His atonement for our sin, all of it. His righteousness as a man, perfect.

The knowledge of good and evil is what made Adam and Eve accountable for sin. In one fell swoop, they not only sinned, but became accountable for it with the knowledge of good and evil. There had to be separation. God is Holy., His justice is driven by that holiness. Genesis 3.

The flesh is only one part of an unregenerated man. He also has a soul/mind and a spirit. A carnal mind sets itself on the things the flesh wants (food, power, sensations). The spiritual mind sets itself on things the spirit wants (justice, truth, love). The man driven from the flesh (instinct/survival) acts contrary to God’s ways (laying down one’s life for others). But a man can develop noble principles through his spirit and mind, and impose those principles on the flesh intermittently. Paul was lamenting his flesh’ power to oppose the noble and drive him to pursue self-preservation. It was bringing him into intermittent sins that condemned him because they kept on stained his record, even after each Day of Atonement, when all his sins were remiited. He was not saying that it was making any good behaviour impossible.

Read Romans 8

Same problem. Not of continuous sinning, but of sometimes/ntermittent/continual sinning, which renders us unrighteous in God’s sight, and because of which we separate ourselves from God.

Read Romans 8

 

[frederickdoc]

Hi Paul

I agree with the seeking part, but not the good and righteous part.

I think that he is saying that man cannot do good or righteousness according to the Law, or according to righteous standards. Remember, Paul is a quoting from the OT in Romans 3, and the topic is justification. The things that a person does may appear to be good to us, but they are tainted with sin, and thus, not good or righteous according to the Law. They cannot earn justification because man is incapable of doing what the Law requires. The difference between myself and Calvinist these days, and traditionally with many Calvinists, is that I don't think that the desire needs to be pure and pass righteous standards. I don't see that idea in Scripture. The initial faith cannot, and does not. The ongoing faith, called the life is Spirit powered and can do good and be righteous as an evidence of someone who is already justified.

This idea that man cannot do good or be righteous from the flesh is repeated everywhere in Scripture. Jesus, speaking from His humanity, said, "why do you call Me good, God alone is Good". Without the Vine, the branches cannot bear good fruit. God calls our righteousness filthy rags. Even Paul, in the same letter to the Romans says the same.

Romans 7:18 For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh) nothing good dwells; for to will is present with me (can desire), but how to perform what is good I do not find (cannot perform the act according to righteous standards, the Law). (in italics added by me)

Romans 8:9-11 But you are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if indeed the Spirit of God dwells in you. Now if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he is not His. And if Christ is in you, the body is dead because of sin, but the Spirit is life because of righteousness. But if the Spirit of Him who raised Jesus from the dead dwells in you, He who raised Christ from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies through His Spirit who dwells in you.

Now put that truth together with this, and the many like it. These are before the cross, and thus, they are still OT....

John 7:38-39 He who believes in Me, as the Scripture has said, out of his heart will flow rivers of living water." But this He spoke concerning the Spirit, whom those believing in Him would receive; for the Holy Spirit was not yet given, because Jesus was not yet glorified.

OT believers did not have the Spirit in them, the source of that good and righteousness.

John 16:7-16 Nevertheless I tell you the truth. It is to your advantage that I go away; for if I do not go away, the Helper will not come to you; but if I depart, I will send Him to you. And when He has come, He will convict the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment: of sin, because they do not believe in Me; of righteousness, because I go to My Father and you see Me no more; of judgment, because the ruler of this world is judged. I still have many things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now. However, when He, the Spirit of truth, has come, He will guide you into all truth; for He will not speak on His own authority, but whatever He hears He will speak; and He will tell you things to come. He will glorify Me, for He will take of what is Mine and declare it to you. All things that the Father has are Mine. Therefore I said that He will take of Mine and declare it to you. "A little while, and you will not see Me; and again a little while, and you will see Me, because I go to the Father."

How far did the presence of God take them in the OT (John 12:35-36)?

Keep in mind that this condition, absent the Holy Spirit indwelling, not born again, is what Paul's Roman 3 passage, quoting the OT, is pointing to. In the OT, believers did not have the Spirit in them, so, apart from the presence of God which I believe drew them, all that they had was the flesh. This is why I believe that Paul quotes the OT saying that 'there are none who does good, no not one, there are none who are righteous, no not one, and all of their works were like filthy rags.'. This means what it says, simply stated, man cannot do anything pleasing to God without the the source being the Holy Spirit in Him doing it. "For what do you have that you did not receive? And if you received it, why do you boast as if you have not (1 Corinthians 4:7)? That's why they are called gifts of the Holy Spirit. Anything good that comes from us is an undeserved gift from God. Righteousness also.

Put it to Action

 

[frederickdoc]

How to be in righteousness

• Jesus' Response: In Matthew 3:15, Jesus replies, "Let it be so now; it is proper for us to do this to
• Fulfill All Righteousness."
• The Meaning: Jesus did not need to be baptized for the forgiveness of sins, because He had no sin. He submitted to the water strictly to set a perfect pattern, pattern of man and obedience, for every believer who would Follow Him.
• Can Anyone Forbid Water?" (The Commanded Baptism)

The exact phrase mentioned—about not forbidding the water—is a direct quote from a critical turning point in the Book of Acts. When the apostle Peter witnesses the Holy Spirit fall upon the Gentile believer Cornelius and his family, Peter looks at the crowd and says:

"Can anyone forbid water, that these should not be baptized who have received the Holy Spirit just as we have?" — Acts 10:47

• The Command: Immediately after asking this, Peter "commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord" (Acts 10:48).
• Reminder Above Jesus
• Let it be so Now; it is proper for us to do this to
• Fulfill All Righteousness."

 

[Dave123]

How to be in righteousness

• Jesus' Response: In Matthew 3:15, Jesus replies, "Let it be so now; it is proper for us to do this to
• Fulfill All Righteousness."
• The Meaning: Jesus did not need to be baptized for the forgiveness of sins, because He had no sin. He submitted to the water strictly to set a perfect pattern, pattern of man and obedience, for every believer who would Follow Him.
• Can Anyone Forbid Water?" (The Commanded Baptism)

The exact phrase mentioned—about not forbidding the water—is a direct quote from a critical turning point in the Book of Acts. When the apostle Peter witnesses the Holy Spirit fall upon the Gentile believer Cornelius and his family, Peter looks at the crowd and says:

• The Command: Immediately after asking this, Peter "commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord" (Acts 10:48).
• Reminder Above Jesus
• Let it be so Now; it is proper for us to do this to
• Fulfill All Righteousness."

I'm not sure exactly what you're saying, just to be clear, and maybe you agree...

"To fulfill all righteousness" is Jesus, as a man, being perfectly obedient to the Law for us. This is how He fulfills the Law for us, which we cannot do for ourselves. It's important to note that in that passage, water baptism is considered a work, or it would not fulfill all righteousness, meaning fulfill the Law. But we are saved by faith, not of works, because Jesus fulfilled the Law for us. We only need to believe and be saved. How to be righteous? Believe the Gospel (Romans 10:1-4). Obeying God's commands be obedient to God as best as we can? Be water baptized after we are are placed into Christ with the Holy Spirit indwelling, that results from faith, as a public declaration of Jesus and what He did for us, for those who cannot see spiritual things. Agree?

 

[frederickdoc]

I'm not sure exactly what you're saying, just to be clear, and maybe you agree...

"To fulfill all righteousness" is Jesus, as a man, being perfectly obedient to the Law for us. This is how He fulfills the Law for us, which we cannot do for ourselves. It's important to note that in that passage, water baptism is considered a work, or it would not fulfill all righteousness, meaning fulfill the Law. But we are saved by faith, not of works, because Jesus fulfilled the Law for us. We only need to believe and be saved. How to be righteous? Believe the Gospel (Romans 10:1-4). Obeying God's commands be obedient to God as best as we can? Be water baptized after we are are placed into Christ with the Holy Spirit indwelling, that results from faith, as a public declaration of Jesus and what He did for us, for those who cannot see spiritual things. Agree?

Not totally i recently posted somewhere I don't use the word works because it's misunderstood by many alsothst Faith in English it's a noun in the Bible most often it is a verb you may have read it cuz I know you like chj posts.. the best example of faith is the lady with the issue of blood in that time frame Jesus call it great Faith. And the word believe translated in the Bible is very weak Satan and the demons believe. The the word translated should have been more like trust but I used the word AMan to absolutely know. I'm not going to pick out everything just to let you know words are power they're either weak or mountain moving

 

[Dave123]

Not totally i recently posted somewhere I don't use the word works because it's misunderstood by many alsothst Faith in English it's a noun in the Bible most often it is a verb you may have read it cuz I know you like chj posts.. the best example of faith is the lady with the issue of blood in that time frame Jesus call it great Faith. And the word believe translated in the Bible is very weak Satan and the demons believe. The the word translated should have been more like trust but I used the word AMan to absolutely know. I'm not going to pick out everything just to let you know words are power they're either weak or mountain moving

There is an ongoing faith, the verb faith, called the life, that will evidence itself a certain way, by good works. The initial faith, the noun, the faith that initially gives us that life and justifies us before God, has nothing to do with our works, as we rely on what Jesus did one hundred percent. We receive those saving ingredients when we are placed into Christ. Some people deliberately confuse the two because they are selling a works based salvation.

I was just pointing out that Jesus needed to fulfill all righteousness, obeying the Father perfectly, because we all failed already. The righteousness of God imputed to us to justify us comes from that moment too. Jesus needed to fulfill all righteousness for this.....Romans 10:1-4

 

[frederickdoc]

There is an ongoing faith, the verb faith, called the life, that will evidence itself a certain way, by good works. The initial faith, the noun, the faith that initially gives us that life and justifies us before God, has nothing to do with our works, as we rely on what Jesus did one hundred percent. We receive those saving ingredients when we are placed into Christ. Some people deliberately confuse the two because they are selling a works based salvation.

I was just pointing out that Jesus needed to fulfill all righteousness, obeying the Father perfectly, because we all failed already. The righteousness of God imputed to us to justify us comes from that moment too. Jesus needed to fulfill all righteousness for this.....Romans 10:1-4

Where we failed Jesus excelled . No doubt .

 

[frederickdoc]

Isn't unbelief a sin? If it is, then you would need to also conclude that Jesus suffered the punishment due for it. Think of the implications for that. This statement in John could not be true....

John 3:18 He who believes in Him is not condemned; but he who does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.

If he did not die for the sin of unbelief, then He did not die for all their sins.

Titus 2:11 is what Jesus prophesied in John 12:32 "And I, if I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all peoples to Myself."" , but applying that to the atonement is a leap that Titus 2:11 doesn't require or allow.

One must come to Jesus in faith to have this atonement. Here's a verse that says the He died for the sins of the world. When comparing the Epistle to the the Gospel according to John, we can see what John meant when he says the "whole world", which often means Jews, with Gentile included. Remember, "salvation has come to the Gentiles"-- Peter--Acts?

Here's what John meant when he said that Jesus died for the sins of the whole world.

-------------------------

1 John 2:2 And He Himself is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the whole world.

John 11:51-52 Now this he did not say on his own authority; but being high priest that year he prophesied that Jesus would die for the nation, and not for that nation only, but also that He would gather together in one the children of God who were scattered abroad.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1 John 2:2 And He Himself is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the whole world.

John 11:51-52 Now this he did not say on his own authority; but being high priest that year he prophesied that Jesus would die for the nation, and not for that nation only, but also that He would gather together in one the children of God who were scattered abroad.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1 John 2:2 And He Himself is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the whole world.

John 11:51-52 Now this he did not say on his own authority; but being high priest that year he prophesied that Jesus would die for the nation, and not for that nation only, but also that He would gather together in one the children of God who were scattered abroad.

-----------------------

The words "all" and "world" and like words do not always mean every individual in Scripture. Every individual in the world did not register for the census required by Caesar Augustus (Luke 2:1), even though it says, "all the world". Is Matthew 3:5 including babies, elderly, disabled? Does Acts 26:4 mean that every single Jew in the world knew Paul? No.

The atonement applies to us when we are placed into Christ.

The Lord Will
is Greatest Faith you ever know
accept and live,, are people not knowing in to keep having question God? Not for them filled with the Holy Spirit. Mind of The anointing have or not that the real question

 

[frederickdoc]

There is an ongoing faith, the verb faith, called the life, that will evidence itself a certain way, by good works. The initial faith, the noun, the faith that initially gives us that life and justifies us before God, has nothing to do with our works, as we rely on what Jesus did one hundred percent. We receive those saving ingredients when we are placed into Christ. Some people deliberately confuse the two because they are selling a works based salvation.

I was just pointing out that Jesus needed to fulfill all righteousness, obeying the Father perfectly, because we all failed already. The righteousness of God imputed to us to justify us comes from that moment too. Jesus needed to fulfill all righteousness for this.....Romans 10:1-4

Jesus is seated on the Throne High Priest now let His Righteousness Jist flow!
Yes Jesus did it now its your turn

 

[frederickdoc]

The most moral and upright person is still a sinner in God's sight.

The world Earth opened up and could hear Jesus Blood Speak
dig on that

 

[frederickdoc]

The Lord Will
is Greatest Faith you ever know
accept and live,, are people not knowing in to keep having question God? Not for them filled with the Holy Spirit. Mind of The anointing have or not that the real question

Great sin to Reject the Holy Spirit! Even worse to Use excuse or lying and saying they have and do not have. And have others to follow them
Raca a warning lead judgment calling somebody Raca even coherent and then the others flag and tag non-righteous

 

[frederickdoc]

Well If jesus didnt fullfill we wouldnt be here?im just amaze how people are in old new old and trying to push righteousness and Grace and

There is an ongoing faith, the verb faith, called the life, that will evidence itself a certain way, by good works. The initial faith, the noun, the faith that initially gives us that life and justifies us before God, has nothing to do with our works, as we rely on what Jesus did one hundred percent. We receive those saving ingredients when we are placed into Christ. Some people deliberately confuse the two because they are selling a works based salvation.

I was just pointing out that Jesus needed to fulfill all righteousness, obeying the Father perfectly, because we all failed already. The righteousness of God imputed to us to justify us comes from that moment too. Jesus needed to fulfill all righteousness for this.....Romans 10:1-4

Not leting The mind of The anointed go forward . All theses post are Old finished Completed .truely whats in black & white, is Much lack of Faith, Question all that Jesus has done and not understand All Jesus is Doing
The only righteous i know is Who The Lord Says Why else would he have not giving out His exact replacement comforter? To Take the Guess Work away!!

 

[frederickdoc]

Well If jesus didnt fullfill we wouldnt be here?im just amaze how people are in old new old and trying to push righteousness and Grace and

Not leting The mind of The anointed go forward . All theses post are Old finished Completed .truely whats in black & white, is Much lack of Faith, Question all that Jesus has done and not understand All Jesus is Doing
The only righteous i know is Who The Lord Says Why else would he have not giving out His exact replacement comforter? To Take the Guess Work away!!

That hardest thing is getting to the water and using the name of Jesus don't let anyone tell you different next and is, so many baptisms claiming they're all the same of God what's their religious ceremonies as far i know there is no ceremonies like old or New! We've been living in a blessing for over 2000 years Can't You See Jesus sitting with his arms still stretched up and out Blessing? He left blessing, the image and is as the angel s spoke same manner